Tanya
L. Wheeler (Wheeler) appeals her conviction for first-degree
statutory sodomy following a jury trial. Wheeler argues that
the trial court abused its discretion in permitting the State
to call two witnesses who were endorsed shortly before trial.
Finding no error, we affirm.

Wheeler
lived with Victim's biological father (Father) in Johnson
County. Victim, who was thirteen years old at the time of the
sexual abuse, stayed with them every other weekend. During
one of these weekends, Wheeler walked in on Father
inappropriately touching Victim. Victim testified that after
observing Father's conduct, Wheeler appeared upset that
Father had not involved her in the abuse of Victim.
Thereafter, Wheeler began engaging in sexual acts against
Victim.

Victim
testified that Wheeler touched Victim's breasts and
vagina with both her hands and mouth in addition to using a
sex toy. These incidents occurred in the bedroom shared by
Wheeler and Father. On multiple occasions when Victim and her
friends were at Father's residence, Wheeler or Father
would call Victim into their bedroom ostensibly because
Victim was in trouble. Once separated from her friends,
Wheeler would touch or rub Victim or use a "strap
on" or "harness" to hold a sex toy in place
and have sex with Victim. These sexual acts often occurred
while Father was present in the room.

Victim
described how on some occasions Father would masturbate while
Wheeler used the sex toy on Victim. When Victim complained
that the sex toy hurt, Wheeler told her that it would stop
hurting soon while Father instructed Victim to keep quiet and
allow Wheeler to do what she wanted. Victim stated that
Wheeler used the sex toy on her at least ten times. She also
described how Wheeler instructed her to touch Wheeler's
breasts and vagina with her mouth. This occurred at least
once while Wheeler was alone with Victim. Finally, Victim
described occasions where Father would engage in sexual
intercourse with Wheeler while Wheeler touched and rubbed
Victim's breasts and vagina. According to Victim, the
last time the sexual abuse occurred was around April 5, 2009,
which was the weekend proceeding Father's arrest for
possession of child pornography.

Following
Father's arrest, Victim informed her mother about
Father's conduct, though she did not at that time
disclose Wheeler's involvement. Victim's mother
contacted police who instructed her to take Victim to
ChildSafe of Sedalia, a child-advocacy-center, where Victim
disclosed the details of being abused by Father. During the
course of the investigation into the allegations, police
interviewed Victim's friend, J.S., who implicated Wheeler
in the abuse as well. A police investigator forwarded this
information to the Johnson County Children's Division
who, in turn, contacted Victim. Victim eventually
acknowledged Wheeler's involvement and gave a second
interview at ChildSafe during which she disclosed the details
of the abuse committed by Wheeler.

Following
the second ChildSafe interview, police interviewed Wheeler,
who denied abusing Victim, but admitted that she owned
several sex toys and gave her consent to the police to seize
them. Victim identified one of these sex toys at trial as the
one used on her by Wheeler. Wheeler was arrested and charged
with one count of first-degree statutory sodomy.

In
addition to calling Victim to testify at trial, the State
also presented testimony from a police detective as well as
J.S. and R.B. who were friends with Victim during the period
of abuse. J.S. testified that on multiple occasions while she
was at Father's residence, Father or Wheeler would call
Victim into their bedroom for allegedly doing something
wrong. She stated that Victim would typically return after
twenty or thirty minutes. R.B. provided nearly identical
testimony but added that Victim would be upset and crying
when she returned from the bedroom. Portions of Victim's
recorded interviews with ChildSafe were also played for the
jury.

Wheeler
testified that she had never inappropriately touched Victim
and that she was unaware of the abuse by Father. She did not
dispute that Victim would occasionally be called into the
bedroom when she was in trouble for the purpose of imposing
discipline and that Victim sometimes left the bedroom in
tears. She stated that Victim was called into the bedroom
"because nobody likes to be berated in front of their
friends and we tried to show her some respect." Wheeler
also called a criminalist from the highway patrol crime lab
who testified that Victim's DNA was not found on the sex
toys recovered from Wheeler; a woman Wheeler had previously
lived with who testified that she discovered a sex toy under
a pillow in the room where Victim slept when at Father's
residence; a friend of Victim who testified that Victim and
Wheeler appeared to have a normal relationship and that
Victim had taken her into Father and Wheeler's bedroom
and showed her sex toys in a nightstand; and a children's
division investigator who testified that Victim did not
report that Wheeler had sexually abused her when Victim made
her initial allegations against Father.

The
jury was given three alternative verdict directors based on
three different acts of sodomy: (1) putting a sex toy in
Victim's vagina; (2) finger-to-vagina sodomy; and (3)
mouth-to-vagina sodomy. The jury found Wheeler guilty on each
submitted verdict director. Wheeler waived jury ...

Our website includes the first part of the main text of the court's opinion.
To read the entire case, you must purchase the decision for download. With purchase,
you also receive any available docket numbers, case citations or footnotes, dissents
and concurrences that accompany the decision.
Docket numbers and/or citations allow you to research a case further or to use a case in a
legal proceeding. Footnotes (if any) include details of the court's decision. If the document contains a simple affirmation or denial without discussion,
there may not be additional text.

Buy This Entire Record For
$7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.